.

[ThomasP]

You are correct, wnazzaro, that's exactly my point. Especially now that the eminent domain guidelines have been altered.

My thoughts and ideas are only possible in a perfect world, in which we do not live. As an employer if I were to advertise a job and its qualifications as leagally as possible, and then I had two people with identical qualifications (i.e. experience and education). The problem is that one person has no physical disability while the second person is in a wheel chair. If I hire the person with no disability wouldn't I then be discriminating against the person in the wheelchair, who would be able to perform the job as well as the other applicant? I personally think I should be able to pick whomever I want without fear of a lawsuit.

Now, let's take the same situation and let the disabled person have 5 more years experience and an extra degree. At this point is where I believe the law should kick in. The disabled applicant, when having more experience, should be hired. That is the best way I know how to explain my displeasure with these laws we are discussing.

[Alex F]

The folks I really feel bad for is INNERCITY. All they wanted was a sousie player and look what we've done to them. Don't worry folks, we don't bite (or if we do, we've had our shots).

These issues obviously stir up a lot of emotion, and I'm not sure this is all that bad. Let's be thankful that we live in country where we can still express these views openly and without fear of reprisal (I hope).

If we treat others in the same way that we want to be treated, most of these problems would go away. It can be an elusive ideal at times, but we need to keep working to "do it right."

[Monty]

The ultimate irony is that most all of the influences they cite are well over their stated age limit - and a few of them are putting out their best stuff of their lives.